EvanRoberts wrote:I agree, really do not like the design of the tower. As much as I am all for increasing the urban density, personally I would like to see new buildings restricted to around ten stories unless the design is of iconic potential.

Eh, why a random 10 stories?

I like the great old cities of Europe like Paris where nearly all buildings are about 6 stories high, this gives for a grand but very human scale and does not feel cold and oppressive. But we already have buildings in the area a bit taller than that, like one central square, so around ten stories would be a reasonable compromise between the needs for the area and other considerations.

As for the square, nothing wrong with sculptures and water features, they always work well.

25 floors seems to be a bit of an average for Cardiff new towers at the moment doesn't it? We do, in theory, have above 30 floors in the pipeline, at least based on current planning permission approvals. Of course, the Hope Street one appears to be on hold, maybe even cancelled in its current form, but hopefully we'll still see something tall and above 30 floors. Hopefully still above 40!

Then we have the Hallinans House replacement, which at its tallest is 32 floors. Now, I know they've yet start on this one, but the news we've had about tenants moving out is pretty significant, particularly considering it's Howells that are driving the project. They are moving into their new offices this summer so maybe we'll see something happen by the end of the year.

However, just look at the image posted by Cardiff from Manchester. Yes, I know it's a much bigger city in a number of ways, but they are powering on as a city aren't they? Just a casual look of tower heights on Wikipedia and you can see a whole batch above 30 floors, several above 40 and one or two moving on above 60 floors. Some perspective!

All of which is true, Kyle, but heaven forfend that we go down the same path as Manchester where development has become an end in itself.

Manchester council has the worst record in the UK for provision of social and affordable housing without a single unit being delivered in the last two years and is probably the worst case of "shiny tower syndrome" we've seen for a long time.

Cardiff is lucky in that much of the development here is driven by Welsh based companies, attuned to the city's nature and needs. Manchester and, to a lesser extent, Liverpool and Leeds are gambling their future on speculative builds sold off plan to gullible Asian investors.

Ash wrote:All of which is true, Kyle, but heaven forfend that we go down the same path as Manchester where development has become an end in itself.

Manchester council has the worst record in the UK for provision of social and affordable housing without a single unit being delivered in the last two years and is probably the worst case of "shiny tower syndrome" we've seen for a long time.

Cardiff is lucky in that much of the development here is driven by Welsh based companies, attuned to the city's nature and needs. Manchester and, to a lesser extent, Liverpool and Leeds are gambling their future on speculative builds sold off plan to gullible Asian investors.

Totally agree with you Ash. What I don't want to ever see is a building going up for the sake of it to satisfy an investor, particularly one that hasn't got a clue about the city, and more importantly social values being pushed aside.

I'm quite proud that Cardiff is doing more than the likes of Manchester in this regard, and I'm really pleased to see local developers leading the way just as much. It's nice to see the likes of Rightacres and JR Smart doing well, good on them.

Ash wrote:All of which is true, Kyle, but heaven forfend that we go down the same path as Manchester where development has become an end in itself.

Manchester council has the worst record in the UK for provision of social and affordable housing without a single unit being delivered in the last two years and is probably the worst case of "shiny tower syndrome" we've seen for a long time.

Cardiff is lucky in that much of the development here is driven by Welsh based companies, attuned to the city's nature and needs. Manchester and, to a lesser extent, Liverpool and Leeds are gambling their future on speculative builds sold off plan to gullible Asian investors.

That article is over the top. It's basically a moan by someone with modest means about being unable to buy in Manchester city centre. Being forced to live a mile away!

I'm in two minds when it comes to significant affordable housing obligations. What it risks is housing becoming the preserve of the affluent and the poor, with those in the middle being unable to afford the private market property, but unable to access the social housing. You find that in large parts of inner London. The rich in their nice properties. The poor in their less nice but still relatively spacious council or social housing. And the middle either crammed into buy to let or living further out.

What we really need is more building. More building on the edge of cities as well as on the holy grail brownfield sites. If you make 3 or 4 bed houses on the edge of town cheaper, more people will be willing to commute in to enjoy that space. And that will mean cheaper prices in the inner city.

EvanRoberts wrote:I like the great old cities of Europe like Paris where nearly all buildings are about 6 stories high, this gives for a grand but very human scale and does not feel cold and oppressive. But we already have buildings in the area a bit taller than that, like one central square, so around ten stories would be a reasonable compromise between the needs for the area and other considerations.

As for the square, nothing wrong with sculptures and water features, they always work well.

I don't think height alone has much to do with why many people like Paris. It more the design of the buildings which are quite uniform and of a certain age.

Paris feels cold and oppressive to me as all the buildings look the same! No individuality at work is oppressive.